JonnyHintz

History

Recent Comments

Obviously it’s a positive for the player. But that’s not what we’re talking about. It isn’t a positive sell to recruits that your program had a kid playing DLine and he was drafted to play offense. Thatd be like OSU claiming Terrelle Pryor and Braxton Miller when talking about developing WRs.

I don’t think they were using the “reading defenses” thing as a knock on Patterson necessarily. As you mentioned, it’s not part of OSUs offense either. But that’s fine if that’s your offense. The issue they bring up, is that reading defenses is a necessity at QB in Michigan’s offense. And that it isn’t something Patterson has shown the ability to do yet.

He’s also publicly treated the QB competitions as dead even even though they clearly haven’t been. Harbaugh doesn’t reveal anything publicly. That doesn’t mean the rivalry isn’t emphasized in the locker room

So for most of the year, our line featured an entire unit of four stars, three of which were top 100 players and another that was borderline top 100 player. We finished 117th in adjusted sack rate. We also have a handful of other top ranked OL on the roster that weren’t able to push those guys for time. Kugler is a son of a football coach and a top 70 player, and couldn’t crack the lineup until his 5th year. This is exactly why so many people (rightfully) say that the recruiting rankings need to be taken with a grain of salt.

We have the 4/5* linemen. We have had them every year. That’s not what makes a good line. Good football players that are coachable and willing to learn and put the effort forward to develop are what makes a good lineman. Not some number next to their name given by some guys who sit behind a computer all day and only see these kids in camps in a T-shirt and shorts or on a highlight film. Neither of which is a great indicator of a good football player.

People like you and so many others are so focused on that number next to the kids name and have no concept of what actually goes into being a good football player. Instead of focusing on his ranking, look at why they’re ranked where they are. Do your own scouting and evaluate the kid yourself. There’s no justifiable reason players like Khaleke Hudson should be ranked as 3* prospects. Look at the individual player and their abilities instead of just looking at their ranking. It’s an incredibly flawed system.

Meh. The Elite 11 camp itself is rarely an indicator of actual QB talent. Plenty of QBs make the Elite11 but never amount to anything in college and then guys who don’t make the Elite 11 are way better.

It’s a cool accolade and all, but winning the Elite 11 ultimately means nothing when it comes to being a good college QB.

Which is another reason the ranking system is so incredibly flawed and need to be taken with a grain of salt. The fans who take these rankings so seriously and as if they’re completely indicative of the talent of the player need to take a chill pill.

Well unless you’re in Minnesota, nobody good plays high school hockey. High school hockey is for the lower level travel and house players.

Generally kids start playing AAA hockey around 10, stick there until they’re 15 or 16, then either go to the USHL, NAHL, or the USNTDP if they’re good enough. From there they either go pro, or go to college.

Not this year. The kid has a lot of potential. But a true freshman with poor mechanics, terrible accuracy and still learning the playbook isn’t going to get a lot of “love.” He needs to get coached up a bit. Right now he’s just a kid with a strong arm that is showing flashes of that high potential. But he’s nowhere near ready to lead this team.

I was speaking more specifically to their offense. Their defense hasn’t been all that bad, but that’s where you can definitely see the talent gap. That’s what is holding the team back from a winning record.

They have one of the top team batting averages in the league. They’re not hitting for power, but they’re getting on base and they’re running more than they have in the past. If I’m not mistaken, the team ERA is also lower.

Basically, they’re playing good, fundamental baseball. They don’t have a lot of talent and obviously part of their record is due to their easy start to the schedule, but they’re doing the little things well.

The planet sized NT isn’t a necessity in college for a number of reasons. You can have a disruptive DT like Mo Hurst be effective in that role despite not having ideal size, and you can also offset the issue by bringing tons of pressure (as Michigan does)

lost More of not, the fact is “Harbaugh can’t win big games,” is seriously overplayed. It seems like it’s only a big game if we lose. People constantly ignore the wins against ranked teams or teams that go on to have great seasons. Not to mention being a dropped punt snap and a blown call away from adding two more of those to the pile.

But since you asked: 5-9 in those games. As I mentioned, a bad bounce or two from being 7-7 in those. That’s a long ways away from “can’t win big games.” And that’s ignoring blowing out a ranked BYU, and beating a Colorado team that played in the PAC-12 title game.

I mean... he’s not wrong. He could even add to that if he wanted. There were at least half a dozen missed holding calls (including the previous play that set up 4th and short) and OSU was getting away with pass interference all day, including two of the more blatant pass interferences I have ever seen go uncalled.

Fact is, the officiating in that game was attrocious and very clearly slanted in OSU’s favor. A competent officiating crew and Michigan wins. Make the correct call on 4th down, and Michigan wins. I truly hate blaming officiating, but the past few years it has looked like Michigan has to be better than OSU AND the officials to win that game.

Yes... the National coaches who don’t know Michigan’s roster, the turnover, or what the team was bringing back.

The coaches poll is the biggest farce in sports. They don’t have time to watch other teams play or study their teams (unless they’re playing them of course). They have no idea who to rank in what spot.

A large portion of people here, who actually know the team really well, saw what we were losing from the year before, saw how young we were, and saw the schedule. 8-4/9-3 was the overwhelming majority of predictions. It was uglier than most people expected, but the prediction was spot on for most.

Harbaugh isn’t going to say that. There is absolutely zero benefit to publicly naming a starting QB. It allows your opponent to scout and gameplan for one QB instead of having to prepare for multiple. It gives Michigan an advantage to not name a starter, so Harbaugh will never do so.

Just because Harbaugh doesn’t make it public, doesn’t mean they don’t know. It doesn’t mean it’s a question mark. Like this guy said, Morris and Rudock were listed as co-starters for weeks. And then when Rudock got hurt against Minnesota, Speight was the QB coming off the bench to win the game. That should tell you all you need to know about how they’re going to publicly handle the QB battle.

Fine, then don’t look into completion percentage. But go ahead and look into the film and scouting which says his accuracy is an issue, he’s inconsistent and shows poor mechanics. All things that contribute to poor completion percentage.

I get it. Fans want to get excited about the brand new shiny four star QB. It was the same with Morris. It was the same with Peters. It was the same with McCaffrey. Now Milton comes in ranked lower (for you ranking junkies) and even more raw and you’re still drooling over the kid. He’s not ready. Hes nowhere close to being ready. He has potential and I’m hoping like hell he reaches it. But he’s a true freshman. It’s not happening.